The five young men arrested for daring to be brown-skinned in Cumbria (aka behaving suspiciously near Sellafield nuclear plant) have all been released without charge – and had not, contrary to MSM lies, been taking photographs of the plant.
Their arrest was first headline in all the main broadcast media, and tabloid front page. Has the fact that they were completely innocent been reported in the mainstream media with equal prominence, or indeed in any way you might find without deliberately looking? No. “Muslims tried to blow up Sellafield” is now another lie inserted into large areas of the popular psyche, as more grist to the mill for the warmongers and those who make money from conflict.
Which is another reason that the Guardian’s contention that political blogging is dead is nonsense. Bloggers are needed more than ever to counteract the lies of the mainstream media in its cosy and poisonous relationship with the state.
I took from Craig’s post – in spite of, or rather, beyond its title – a poignant criticism of the mainstream media in relation to how such episodes tend to be reported (and then their often benificent resolution not reported).
I wouldn’t pay too much attention to those who post aggressive comments on media blogs; such places tend to attract a greater proportion of lunatics than is extant among the general population. They tend to skew the online represntation of ‘Everyman’. Not that I am a lunatic, of course… I am completely sane… truly…
Thanks Mary. I am watching the site:
–
http://www.perdana4peace.net/
I have put the story up on:
–
http://www.citizencam.co.uk with a link to perdana4peace. I have sent the story in a listed email to main media editors. (54)
Re: Clark’s reference to my “baseless accusations against Craig”.
I provide in greater detail here the basis for the accusation that Craig’s charges of racism are baseless.
What appears to be baseless, and what has been asserted without evidence, is Craig Murray’s charge of racism against the Civil Nuclear Constabulary.
The link to the basis for the accusation that Craig’s charges of racism are baseless, should have been this.
Thanks for your commments Clark and Mark and for the support.
RIP Lord Onslow who died today. A good man and interesting too. One of the old school.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13423573
.
He was the only one on the Joint Committee on Human Righta who had enough humanity in him to show concern about Craig’s evidence on torture.
.
Craig wrote in 2009: ‘Now I have had time to consider my appearance to give evidence to parliament last Tuesday, my overwhelming impression remains the lack of compassion displayed by the MPs. They seemed to have no particular concern about men, women and children screaming in agony under torture. They were solely concerned with whether the government’s collusion with it could be justified by legal sophistry. It may be that they are genuinely motivated by humanitarian concern, but the Earl of Onslow was the only one who really gave me that feeling.’
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LF9spgagSHI
{http://craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/05/condoleeza_rice_1/}
Here he is in full flow to Cameron in 2006. Whatever must he have thought of the present crowd in power now?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/apr/23/comment.conservatives
Of course the police have been through the racial discrimination dance before. Blacks rather than Browns, stop and search instead of “terrorism” (with or without a camera). The Special Patrol Group (SPG) were famous for it. Eventually we had the Brixton riots.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5dy9URkLFI
.
Mary, Lord Onslow was indeed the only one to ask any moral questions at Craig’s JCHR hearing. I’m sorry to hear that he’s gone.
Mary, thank you for the link to Lord Onslow’s powerful letter. Canspeccy, you sometimes seem to support the old traditions. Read that letter, and think hard.
CONTROL ORDERS OR TPIMS
Craig said, ‘Control Orders remain a cruel act of degradation of people who have never been convicted of anything, utterly incompatible with human rights.’
–
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/03/control_orders_1/
–
The number of suspected British terrorists subject to control orders has increased to 10, the Home Secretary said today.
Theresa May said three of these were living in the Metropolitan Police service area while the remaining seven were based elsewhere in the UK.
–
Two new control orders have been served since the last quarterly update to MPs in December, she said.
–
A further control order has been made but has not yet been served, Mrs May said.
–
Control Orders will last until end 2011 and will be replaced by Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (Tpims).
These new powers will be limited to two years and will only be renewed “if there is new evidence that they have re-engaged in terrorism-related activities”, the Home Office said.
–
The LibDem pledge to reduce the limit of precharge detention from 28 to 14 days will go ahead, although it may be extended in exceptional cases.
–
16-hour curfews WILL BE CHANGED to ‘overnight residence requirements’ typically 10 hours.
–
The overnight stays will be monitored by electronic tags and the suspects can apply to spend a night away from their main residence.
–
Limited monitored use of the internet on a home computer will also be permitted, provided that all passwords are provided to the authorities.
–
Curfews and further restrictions on communications, association and movement could all be brought in as part of the Home Office “exceptional emergency measures.
–
There are still extremely limited rights of appeal and no double jeopardy restrictions.
–
The European Convention of Human Rights. Article 5 states that while a government may “restrict liberty” they may not “deprive liberty” without just cause, which is stated as “war or other public emergency threatening the nation”. In June 2006, 6 control orders were nullified by a high court judge as breaching the ECHR.
–
In their 2010 election manifesto, the Liberal Democrats pledged to “scrap control orders”, a promise obviously broken.
–
Given the criticism the current government gave the former for the “draconian” measures of preventing terrorism, the reformation we have seen from control orders to TPIMS is hardly impressive.
Interesting. Wonder what lies behind this.
Coalition faces continued calls for new inquiry into Dr David Kelly’s death, reveals minister By William Green on May 17, 11 08:17 AM
.
Below is a written Parliamentary question from Tory MP Patrick Mercer to Attorney-General Dominic Grieve about Dr David Kelly – and comes after a mystery emerged around a helicopter landed near at the scene of the weapons inspector death.
Patrick Mercer: To ask the Attorney-General how many representations he has received on the need for a coroner’s inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly.
The Attorney-General: There has been a large amount of correspondence received on this matter since the first request was made to the Attorney-General to apply to the court for an inquest to be ordered into the death of Dr David Kelly by the hon. Member for Lewes (Norman Baker) in 2008.
Since then representations have been made by letter, e-mail and telephone. No complete record of the total number of representations made has been maintained.
However, I can say that since July 2010 I have given 14 written replies in answer to letters from Members of Parliament.
In addition, since January 2011, I have received 82 pieces of correspondence from 22 individuals making representations of some kind in respect of this matter
http://blogs.journallive.co.uk/journalblogcentral/2011/05/coalition-faces-continued-call.html
Thanks Mary – I did not know the helicopter landed near the scene.
–
An FOI request revealed the knife ostensibly used to cut his wrists was clean – not even a partial finger-print.
–
Press Association
Monday October 15, 2007 12:48 PM
–
New evidence surrounding the death of MoD scientist Dr David Kelly has added to suspicions that he was murdered, an MP has claimed.
–
Liberal Democrat Norman Baker revealed no fingerprints were found on the penknife Dr Kelly apparently used to kill himself.
Dr David Kelly PBUH – UNANSWERED QUESTIONS:
–
1. Why were there no finger-prints on David Kelly’s knife, pill packets, water bottle, glasses, mobile or watch? He wore no gloves. The absence of prints was NOT mentioned at Hutton.
–
2. Lord Hutton said photographic evidence showed David Kelly was found propped up against a tree. Vanessa Hunt, a paramedic of fifteen years who was first at the scene said he was originally flat on his back. Who moved the body and why?
–
3. DC Coe of Thames Valley Police, who guarded David’s body after it had been found, has admitted concealing the presence of an identified man at the scene. Why?
–
4. Dr Malcolm Warner, David’s GP told Robert Jackson MP he saw the corpse immediately after its discovery. Warner failed to report this fact at the inquest. Why?
–
5. Photographs of David’s body, medical evidence and scientific reports have been classified ‘secret’. On what legal basis was this done?
–
6. The death certificate is false. Why?
–
7. Key witnesses were not called to give evidence at the inquiry. Why?
–
8. According to neighbours a 110 ft radio mast was erected outside David Kelly’s house immediately after he was declared missing on July 18th. What was its purpose and why were *unintelligible* messages transmitted from here according to a local retired radio ham.
–
9. Paramedics on the scene, Dave Bartlet and Venessa Hunt did not observe a massive loss of blood. Eminent consultant surgeons have rejectED haemorrhage as the cause of death. They have been refused a further inquiry. Why?
Am I the only person to notice that neither Craig Murray nor anyone commenting here has provided the slightest justification for Craig Murray’s bizarre charge that the arrest, questioning and release of a group of Bangladeshi immigrants whose actions might have represented a threat to the security of a nuclear installation was an act of “state racial hate.”
Murray’s thinking would appear to exclude the role of “state racial hate” in an incident involving white indigenous people arrested and questioned over actions that might represent a threat to the security of a nuclear installation. Therefore, one is forced to the conclusion that Murray believes it an act of “state racial hate” for British authorities to arrest any colored immigrant for any reason whatever.
Is this madness, or just anti-white racism?
“Is this madness, or just anti-white racism?”
.
Have you provided the slightest bit of evidence that this is anti-white racism?
.
“colored immigrant”
.
Does anyone find it strange that a so-called English immigrant to Canada would use an American spelling of “coloured”?
.
Has anyone seen Alfred’s birth certificate to verify that he wasn’t born in China?
.
Does anyone know where he was on the night of David Kelly’s death or on 9/11?
Angry adds his own name to the list of those unable to provide the slightest justification for Craig Murray’s bizarre charge that the arrest, questioning and release of a group of Bangladeshi immigrants whose actions might have represented a threat to the security of a nuclear installation was an act of “state racial hate.”
His comment provides the usual deviation, distraction and defamation that one has come to expect of Craig Murray’s sock puppet.
His comment provides the usual deviation, distraction and defamation that one has come to expect of Craig Murray’s sock puppet.
.
I’m sure Craig Murray will be quite flattered to hear that my literary musings bear his hallmark.
Angy confirms that he has no evidence to support Craig Murray’s charge of “state racial hate.”
Racism, is, we all understand, a vicious thing, and a crime even. Therefore, a false charge of racism is also a vicious thing, just as a false charge of rape, which Craig Murray greatly deplores, is a vicious thing. Craig Murray has made a false charge of racism against the British state. We know that the British state remains dominated by white people indigenous to the British Isles. So I stand by my assertion that Craig Murray’s baseless charge of “state racial hatred” constitutes self-hating anti-white racism.
Craig Murray has made a false charge of racism against the British state. We know that the British state remains dominated by white people indigenous to the British Isles. So I stand by my assertion that Craig Murray’s baseless charge of “state racial hatred” constitutes self-hating anti-white racism.
.
Maybe the British State can take Craig Murray to the High Court and demand monies for libel.
“Maybe the British State can take Craig Murray to the High Court and demand monies for libel.”
Not likely. The British state is run largely by Craig Murray’s Liberal friends only too keen to recruit the immigrant vote and the votes of indigenous saps deluded by the propaganda of political correctness. With those people, trashing the British race, when not denying its existence, is all to the good. If there is a “state racial hate machine…” it is the apparatus of state indoctrination through schools, universities and the quangos that enforce the laws of political correctness in order to humiliate, demoralize and deracinate the indigenous people.